Sudan, 1993

Allow me at the outset to

express to Ambassador Insanally my special congratulations

on his election to preside over the General Assembly at this

important session. He represents Guyana, an active member

of the Non-Aligned Movement, of which Sudan is proud to

be a founding member. May I also extend our thanks and

appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Stoyan Ganev for the

skilful and efficient manner in which he conducted the work

of the previous session.

The United Nations represents hope for all nations and

nascent States, especially those that attained their

independence through long struggle. It is a great honour and

pleasure for me to welcome our sister country, Eritrea,

which has joined the membership of the United Nations.

Our two peoples continue to enjoy mutual respect and

esteem, and our Governments are endeavouring to foster

fraternal relations with a view to achieving prosperity for the

brotherly peoples of the two countries, and for the whole

region.

Allow me also to salute the Czech Republic, Slovakia,

The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Monaco and

Andorra, which joined the United Nations as part of a new

momentum contributing to human endeavours to achieve

stability, prosperity and peace for the world.

I also salute the Secretary-General ,

Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who is leading the Secretariat of

the United Nations at a crucial stage as it faces many

challenges and pressures.

The Sudan learned with grief and sadness of the tragic

loss of life in the earthquake which struck parts of India. I

extend the deepest sympathy of the Sudan to friendly India

along with heartfelt condolences to the families of those who

lost their lives.

Since the previous session, important events have

emerged in the international arena. We are now witnessing

accelerated political and social change unprecedented in

history. New international situations and changes occur

every day; we are all trying to keep up with them. Today,

we are experiencing a phase of travail and transition, which

results every day in new, divergent patterns. The most

striking of those patterns is the widening of the gap between

the rich North and the less privileged South.

The trend in today’s world is towards the machinery of

regional groupings. This reflects the fact that the world has

already started to be more inclined to think in a more

collective manner. We hope that this new pattern will be

positive and constructive, giving due respect to the charters

and covenants that are binding on all. We seriously assert

that developing countries are no longer principal partners in

most of the resolutions that are adopted, particularly within

the framework of the Security Council and other United

Nations organs. Had developing countries been allowed

equitable participation, their contribution could have been

more effective in the course of many of these important

events, specially in the field of regional and international

peace and security.

Four years ago we started reviewing the functions of

the United Nations and its various organs. We must place

on record, from this rostrum, our conviction that this

Organization has a basic role to play in the maintenance of

international peace and security and the achievement of

prosperity for mankind. For the United Nations fully to

perform such a vital role, its governing Charter must be fully

respected. The Charter must also be adhered to by all, and

must be updated to keep pace with the developments that

have occurred since its adoption.

The General Assembly too should be enabled fully to

perform its functions for the maintenance of peace and

security. The General Assembly should be given its due

importance, equal and parallel to that of the Security

Council.

Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 35

Selectivity in implementing the provisions of the

Charter must be abandoned. In this regard, we firmly stress

that the activities of the Security Council must be transparent

and that the Council should adopt a democratic approach in

its decisions. It is thus inevitable that the question of the

Council’s permanent membership, and the right of veto,

which enables a few States to invalidate the opinion of the

majority, be reviewed, especially at a time when the United

Nations is advocating the values of democracy, participation,

justice and equality.

The United Nations and one of its organs, the Security

Council, are currently engaged in serious and active attempts

to settle disputes based on new prospects for the

establishment of regional and international peace and

security. Let us pause here for a moment. We all aspire to

save the world from the calamities of war and the

destructive consequences of the prevailing social and

economic situation. Yet, at the same time, we reject double

standards in the resolutions of the Security Council,

especially in relation to international peace and security. We

are anxious lest the United Nations lose its proper vision in

the heat of events.

The nature of the responsibilities and duties of the

Organization requires strict neutrality. International peace

and security is a principle that must apply to all. But to see

the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina suffer to the brink of

elimination because of the shaky and defective resolutions of

the Security Council is a situation that should not be allowed

to pass unnoticed. Similarly, the Somali people cannot be

allowed to remain victims of irregularities committed by the

international forces there because of the departure from their

binding original mandate. This is a matter that requires both

change and a strict and immediate investigation. We are still

witnessing the deterioration of the security situation in

Somalia owing to the continuing fighting between the

international forces and some of the Somali factions, as well

as with individuals. This has resulted in many killings and

has caused the international forces to stray from their

original mandate. We have previously expressed our

reservations with regard to the hasty use of international

forces in Somalia without consulting the States of the region

or exhausting the efforts and endeavours being exerted by

those States to find a solution to the Somali crisis.

We are concerned that the continuation of fighting

between the international forces and some of the Somali

factions will shed more blood, complicate the problem and

render it insoluble by the United Nations. Therefore, we

request the United Nations and the forces that are supposed

to operate under its banner to refrain from continuing the

type of actions that would provoke the Somali people and

the country’s factions or affect the structure of their political

future, values and cultural and religious heritage.

We also deem it fitting that the Permanent Committee

on Somalia of the States of The Horn of Africa be given the

necessary time to perform its pioneering function of finding

a solution to the Somali crisis. These States are better

acquainted with the nature and dimension of the problem by

virtue of their special relations with Somalia and its people.

We will support new international arrangements that

will ensure the enhancement of the performance of the

Organization and establish justice and tranquillity among all.

The arrangements we are hoping for shall not infringe upon

the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States or meddle

with their independence or right of decision-making.

Preventive diplomacy, associated with peacemaking and

peace-keeping, should be motivated by a basic goal, namely,

the elimination of regional and international tension. This

could be achieved by defining the causes of political and

social conflicts in order to eliminate them so that different

societies might enjoy stability, well-being, and peace.

Preventive diplomacy and the subsequent use of political and

military force cannot be applied solely against less privileged

countries and vulnerable peoples.

In brief, we are hoping for a new formula within the

framework of current international arrangements to guarantee

the rights of all and to save the world from the hegemony of

the stronger over the less privileged. We also aspire to a

greater role for the regional organizations of the developing

countries and to their representation in the important forum

of the Security Council, which is entrusted with the task of

maintaining peace and security all over the world.

Along with this understanding of the new role of the

United Nations in protecting and preserving the rights of

States, we call for the lifting of the economic embargo

imposed on Iraq. The Iraqi people have suffered for an

extended period of time from the unfair embargo that is still

imposed on them, despite the exhaustion of the reasons that

invoked it.

Another example of the misuse of this international

Organization is the embargo imposed on Libya without any

legal and justified cause to permit the actions taken against

that country. Libya has already responded to Security

Council resolution 731 (1992) and shown sufficient

flexibility to settle its differences with the Western States, a

matter that would justify the lifting of the embargo imposed

on it.

36 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session

The agenda items before this session include important

issues reflecting the accelerated pace of events I mentioned

at the beginning of my statement. However, I prefer to be

direct in touching upon issues of immediate concern to us in

the Sudan because of the misunderstanding that has

accompanied them.

During the forty-eighth session of the Human Rights

Commission, held at Geneva in March 1992, and upon a

motion by the United States representative, the Commission

adopted a resolution appointing an independent expert

assigned to investigate the human-rights situation in the

Sudan and to submit a report to the forty-ninth session of the

Commission in March-April 1993. The States sponsoring

that resolution did not wish to wait for the report of the

independent expert but pushed the matter to the forty-seventh

session of the General Assembly, where a resolution on the

alleged human-rights violations in the Sudan was adopted.

The sponsoring States used all the influence, pressure and

the mechanical majority they possessed to see that that

politically motivated resolution was adopted.

In his report to the forty-ninth session of the

Commission on Human Rights in March 1993, the

independent expert praised the cooperation of the

Government of the Sudan and explained that he had had

neither the time nor the opportunity to judge the situation of

human rights in the Sudan or to study the matter

comprehensively. He indicated that the Commission might

wish to extend his mission in order to allow him to complete

his mandate. While we do not conceive of any justifiable

reasons behind his appointment, the Government of the

Sudan nevertheless extended every possible cooperation to

the Special Rapporteur, who visited the Sudan last week and

will submit his report.

Respect for and maintenance of human rights represent

one of the sacred principles that are enshrined in all divine

religions as well as in man-made laws. The Sudan, inspired

by its cultural and civilized heritage, pays due attention to

the issues of human rights. The Sudanese Government and

society respect and observe the human-rights values based

on their religious belief and traditions. Accordingly, we

reject any politicization or manipulation of such a sacred

doctrine as a pretext for meddling in the internal affairs of

States or for imposing a specific cultural trend or option of

civilization on any State. For the same reason, we are of the

view that developmental assistance should not be tied to a

distorted human-rights record. The right to development

itself represents an inalienable human right. We also opt for

equality and fairness in assessing or monitoring the

performance of States in the field of human rights. We

adamantly reject policies that reflect a double standard in

dealing with human rights, because the Sudan has been

victimized by such policies. We also hope that universality

of human rights will not be construed to justify denial of the

cultural, religious and indigenous specifics of various States

and peoples.

Those who pose as defenders of human rights in the

Sudan ignore the terrorist practices of the outlaws in

southern Sudan lead by John Garang. They have opted to

keep silent with respect to the atrocities he has committed,

atrocities such as the abduction and recruitment of children

for military operations, the regular killing of civilian

populations, the downing of civilian aircraft and the

kidnapping and killing of United Nations staff working in

relief operations. They have also kept silent with regard to

his continued obstruction of all serious peacemaking

endeavours initiated inside or outside the Sudan. Not only

that, they have received him as a top official dignitary and

extended to him every moral support, despite his gross

violation of human rights.

In this connection we view General Assembly

resolution 47/142 as a biased resolution that has contributed

to the intransigence of the Garang movement and motivated

it to reject all Government endeavours to achieve a peaceful

settlement through negotiations. We are also convinced that

that resolution lacks any substantive justification, and we

stand ready to provide all the factual information on the

human-rights situation in the Sudan to all who are interested.

Those who accuse the Government of the Sudan of

violating the human rights of its own citizens have also

ignored the giant achievements of the Government, such as

adopting the conferences system along the lines of Shura

and organizing the national conferences to determine the

structure of the political system in order to lay down the

basic foundations of national unity and to look for ways and

means to achieve a real peace guaranteeing fundamental

political, social, cultural and religious rights for all citizens.

As a result, a National Transitional Assembly was

established as the supreme legislative organ of the country,

pending completion of the political structures at both the

federal and the state level and the conduct of the presidential

elections to be held in the country at a subsequent stage.

Many must have learned of the recent decision of the

United States Government to add the Sudan to its own

classification of countries allegedly sponsoring terrorism.

While the United States Government is free to take whatever

decision it deems appropriate, we have the right to question

the facts and findings on which the United States

Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 37

Government has based its decision. While the United States

has the right to enact domestic decisions, the utilization of

such decisions as a prelude to further actions beyond its

territories contradicts international law and the United

Nations Charter. We cannot understand how a super-Power

which enjoys permanent membership in the Security Council

can enact domestic legislation to justify the pursuit of its

private interests in the territories of other countries. Such

instances are numerous, the most recent of which was the

search in the port of Djibouti of a vessel freighting sugar en

route to sisterly Somalia.

It is our conviction that the motive behind the media

campaign against the Sudan is the alienation of Sudan from

its African and Arab affiliations and the smearing of its

image by erroneously labelling its civilization as terrorist.

This media campaign constitutes a prelude to a siege on

Sudan similar to what has happened to some other countries.

We are known to all as a peaceful nation; we denounce

terrorism in all its forms. Accordingly, the decision lacks the

necessary legal support, contravenes justice and good

conscience and clearly exceeds the role of the United

Nations. As proof of our assertion, it could not generate any

support. Former President Jimmy Carter and a number of

credible institutions and newspapers have expressed their

scepticism and criticism regarding its ethical value.

Likewise, the Sudanese peoples have demonstrated their

rejection and denunciation of that decision. Real terrorism

is when a single super-Power uses it as a pretext and utilizes

its might to terrorize small developing countries for no

reason except that they opted for a path of independent

decision-making and rejected blind proselytism, or merely

for their different views.

Mixing politics with humanitarian assistance is rather

risky, especially in relief work, which is a sensitive matter,

as it directly affects human survival through supplying basic

needs such as food and medicine. This necessitates the

absolute neutrality of the relief donors. Recent years have

witnessed an increasing involvement of politics in

humanitarian work, which fact led Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga,

President of the International Committee of the Red Cross

(ICRC) to explicitly warn against the danger of mixing

politics with humanitarian work. Sudan has suffered

tremendously from these attempts to tarnish its image by

intentionally distorting its achievements in relief delivery so

that they are seen as failures, its initiatives depicted as

obstructions and its cooperation as impediment of the inflow

of relief supplies. The reality is that we feel we are unjustly

treated by some States and some media that tend to

undermine our efforts in relief operation and blemish our

reputation.

However, Sudan has a bright and outstanding record in

this area. Operation Lifeline Sudan is an unprecedented

initiative; it has enabled the United Nations and

non-governmental organizations to provide relief supplies to

affected populations, whoever and wherever they are. Since

the forty-seventh session, continuous efforts have been made

to strengthen the efficiency of Operation Lifeline and its

relief programme, such as the signing of an agreement

between the Government of the Sudan, the United Nations

and the rebel factions in December 1992 to secure the flow

of relief to all areas in need. In January 1993, another

agreement was signed between the Government of the

Sudan, the United Nations and the non-governmental

organizations to facilitate and enhance the role of the non-

governmental organizations in relief and rehabilitation. In

March 1993, the Government of the Sudan signed a

memorandum of understanding with the International

Committee of the Red Cross to streamline the cooperation

between the Government and the Committee and to

strengthen the effectiveness of its operations in southern

Sudan. The allocation of 153,000 metric tons of grain by

the Government to the World Food Programme to be

distributed to the population in need represents a cornerstone

of our contribution to relief efforts.

The mission of Mr. Vieri Traxler, Special Envoy of the

Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs for the Sudan,

and its positive outcome, stand as another example of the

cooperation of the Government of the Sudan with the

international community. A number of modalities were

agreed upon during that mission to guarantee the full

implementation of all previously signed agreements. It is

my pleasure to convey to this Assembly that during Mr.

Traxler’s mission to the Sudan a number of steps were taken

to implement what was agreed upon. On the initiative of the

Government of the Sudan, an agreement was reached to send

joint assessment missions, constituted by the United Nations

and the non-governmental organizations working in relief

operations, to about 30 safe locations in the three Southern

States, the Nuba mountains and Kordofan. It was also

agreed that the town of Malakal and its environs would be

considered a model of relief integrated programmes to be

implemented in other areas after proving successful. This is

in addition to other steps oriented towards strengthening the

efficiency of operations and ensuring relief for those in

need wherever they may be.

Allow me to acquaint this Assembly with the

achievements of the Government of Sudan in political,

economic and social fields. The priority item on my

Government’s agenda is to attain a just and lasting peace in

southern Sudan and to put an end to the war that horrified

38 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session

innocent civilians and devastated their lives, the war that

exposed them to the scourges of death, famine, disease and

displacement. This war, which was the by-product of the

colonial conspiracy, has turned the citizens into recipients of

relief and made them dependent on others. It constitutes a

perpetual squandering of vast resources that could have been

utilized in economic and social development and for the

welfare of the Sudanese peoples in the south and the north.

Faithful to its earnest endeavours to bring about a

peaceful settlement of the discord in the south, the Sudanese

Government has emphasized since 1989 its readiness to talk

peace with the rebels without preconditions. The

Government put forward a comprehensive framework for

peace emanating from the recommendations of a national

conference. This approach is based on remedying the

lingering causes of the conflict in the areas of power- and

wealth-sharing, relations between religion and State, adoption

of the federal system of government to meet the aspirations

of different regions for a genuine sharing of power, the

exemption of the south from the application of Sharia laws

and the redistribution and reallocation of resources for social

and economic development on equitable grounds.

In this positive spirit the Government held several

rounds of negotiations with the rebel movement. The last

meeting took place in Abuja with the mediation of sisterly

Nigeria. The Government, out of its keen desire to bring the

peace talks to a successful conclusion, showed great

flexibility, but it realized, unfortunately, that, owing to the

pressures of foreign interests, Garang’s faction was not the

master of its decision. That was why we could not reach an

agreement in order to alleviate the suffering of our citizens

in the south.

The failure of the second Abuja peace talks did not,

however, weaken the determination of the Government to

continue searching for peace through negotiations. To this

end, the Government started a new round of negotiations,

this time in Sudanese territory, with the other united rebel

factions. The Government also accepted a quadrilateral

peace initiative put forward by four Heads of State members

of the Intergovernmental Authority for Drought and

Development (IGADD): Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia and

Eritrea. We believe that neighbouring countries are able and

keen to help in resolving this stalemate. Furthermore, the

Government accepted the initiative of former President

Jimmy Carter in mediating between the Government and the

rebel factions.

In the area of economic development, the Government

of the Sudan adopted an ambitious three-year economic

programme for the implementation of far-reaching reforms

in the structure of the Sudanese economy by engaging in a

free-market policy, diminishing the role of the Government

in trade and economic activities, and giving the private

sector its due catalytic role in these activities.

Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 39

Economic and monetary regulations were enacted to

encourage investment, especially in agriculture and animal

products. This economic programme reaped its fruits, and

we have registered an increase of over 10 per cent in the

rate of growth of the gross national product, as well as self-

sufficiency in grain and sugar. This programme energized

the economy and led to the inflow of foreign investment,

owing to the free-market policy, the reform of the

infrastructure and the building up of the capacity of human

resources.

All these developments could have achieved positive

results, not for the benefit of the Sudanese people alone, but

also for the African and Arab regions, had they not been

forestalled by political machinations in areas of international

trade and economic cooperation, as well as interference in

the work of the international monetary institutions. An

unjust and undeclared economic embargo deprived the Sudan

of development resources from bilateral and multilateral

institutions. This unjust behaviour deprived the people of

the Sudan of their right to development, a right enshrined in

all international conventions.

In the social field, the Government is very attentive to

the needs of the impoverished sector of the population.

Financial support is increasingly extended to them through

Zakat funds and social-welfare institutions. A number of

commercial subsidies were introduced to alleviate the

economic burden of a broad sector of the population.

Salaries in the public and private sectors were increased and

subjected to continuous revision. All this was done in full

compliance with and respect for human dignity, and to

eliminate poverty.

Moreover, in the area of legislation, the Government

excluded the States with non-Muslim majorities from being

subjected to Sharia laws.

In the area of human rights, a Supreme Council for

Human Rights was established, under the chairmanship of

the second-highest ranking official in the State.

Security prevails throughout the country, the rule of law

has replaced chaos, and there have been other great

accomplishments in the fields of education, literacy, health,

environment, and the improvement of the living conditions

of displaced persons and their relocation to ensure a

dignified life while they await the elimination of the

conditions that forced them to become displaced persons.

The position of Sudan has remained clear ever since the

commencement of the Arab-Israeli peace talks: we believe

that they should lead to the exercise of Arab and Palestinian

rights based on the provisions of Security Council

resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978). Since

the signing of the Declaration of Principles of self-autonomy

between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and

Israel, the Middle East and the Palestinians’ cause have

entered a new phase. The Arab League Council of

Ministers, after its 100th meeting in Cairo, issued a

communiqué on this agreement based on Security Council

resolutions. The communiqué emphasized the necessity of

an Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied Arab territories

in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jerusalem, the Golan

Heights and southern Lebanon so as to open a new page in

the history of the Middle East and enable the people of the

region to work for development and prosperity. The Arab

League Council considered the agreement a step forward

towards the establishment of a comprehensive peace in the

region, provided that other steps to complement it were

guaranteed such as a complete Israeli withdrawal from the

occupied Syrian Golan Heights, the West Bank, including

Jerusalem, and the territory in southern Lebanon.

The Arab world has articulated its judgement on this

historic agreement and proved its sincerity about desiring a

just, lasting and comprehensive settlement in the region. At

this critical point in time, we appeal to our Palestinian

brothers to consolidate their unity and unify their

determinant objectives. They should close the doors against

any attempts to divide them. The United Nations is called

upon to supervise this peace plan by insisting on the

implementation of all its resolutions based on international

legitimacy. The custodians of this peace plan are also called

upon to ensure an expeditious Israeli withdrawal from all the

occupied Arab and Palestinian territories, in full compliance

with the relevant United Nations resolutions.

The positive developments taking place in South Africa

as a result of the struggle of our brothers and sisters there in

their quest for emancipation, equality and the rule of the

majority stand as proof of the important role the United

Nations can play in accordance with the principles of the

Charter whenever a Member State shows the necessary

political will. My delegation associates itself with the leader

Nelson Mandela in his call upon the international

Organization to secure the transitional arrangements leading

to the emergence of a democratic, unified and non-racial

South Africa.

As an African country, we believe that Africa has

demonstrated throughout history its unique ability to resolve

African disputes through African mediation. In this regard,

I salute the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the

40 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session

Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Desertification

(IGADD), the Economic Community of West African States

(ECOWAS) and all other African subregional organizations,

as well as various African States that have played leading

roles in the peaceful settlement of several disputes in such

countries as Rwanda and Liberia,

thus contributing to peace and stability in Africa. We hope

that peace will soon prevail in Angola, Mozambique and

Somalia so that Africa can enjoy the stability that will enable

it to meet the challenges of construction and development

and move towards prosperity for the African people and

people of the whole world.